A380 costs, delays causing headaches at Emirates

A350XWB · Post by **A350XWB** » 15 Mar 2007, 09:14

Emirates President Tim Clark told ATWOnline last week in Berlin that the operating costs of its A380 fleet will be higher than originally planned.

"There are still an extra six tons of weight we can't get out of the A380. That will cost us extra money in operation for the next 10 or 15 years," Clark said.

." He said a Boeing sales team was in Dubai about two weeks ago to discuss the 747-8 Intercontinental, which Clark said he likes but which would not be able to fulfill certain missions important to the carrier, like nonstop Dubai-Los Angeles service with 400 passengers and a full cargo payload

http://atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=8229

chunk · Post by **chunk** » 15 Mar 2007, 09:26

Emirates are always bleating out in the open, They should concentrate on getting their service standards back up to where they used to be / should be rather than complaing about this constantly. Besides, even if they got the A380 tomorrow DXB would be an even bigger disaster than it currently is. It cannot cope with all the traffic Emirates is putting through it as it is and I hope they suffer for it to be honest.

It sums Dubai up very nicely - lets get as much money and people in here as possible.....we can worry about the infrastructure later. Look at the city traffic problems and you will see what i mean. THey will NEVER solve the issue because everything is done too late and they are always playing catch up. The airport and EMirates are no different.

b720 · Post by **b720** » 15 Mar 2007, 09:44

Not quite fair.... Their economic growth is mindblowing and I do understand that their infrastructure is not catching up; however that infrastructure (airport included) is by far superior to that in most of western europe (except germany and scandinavia). I guess that we should admire Emirates and Dubai, and wish we our countries enjoyed half of their growth...

PlaneHunter · Post by **PlaneHunter** » 15 Mar 2007, 21:40

It's amazing how many people constantly complain about EK's "slipping standards" - though they still offer a superior product compared to many Asian/ME and most European and US longhaul carriers (Eco class).

PH

summersso · Post by **summersso** » 15 Mar 2007, 22:42

chunk wrote:It sums Dubai up very nicely - lets get as much money and people in here as possible.....we can worry about the infrastructure later. Look at the city traffic problems and you will see what i mean. THey will NEVER solve the issue because everything is done too late and they are always playing catch up.

I've lived in and visited Dubai and Abu Dhabi many times, and I think this statement is grossly unjustified. Dubai, in particular, is a classic case of *supply driven demand* - they create an airline with flights to the middle of the desert, they build hotels, they build skycrapers etc all in expectation that this will (and the statistics have shown it has) encourage tourism and business interest in the city and region. The city is a building site, true, but unlike many Western cities they actually seem to be addressing their deficiencies rather than ignoring them.

bits44 · Post by **bits44** » 15 Mar 2007, 23:13

There seems to be a lot of prejudice and discrimination creeping into these forums, if we don't start to eliminate them we will be no better than that other airline forum, and I still don't get what Dubai or the UAE has got to do with Tim Clark stating its going to have higher operating costs for its A380's because they are overweight.

Maybe the moderators should edit some of the statements that are made on a personal basis.

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 15 Mar 2007, 23:44

bits44 wrote:There seems to be a lot of prejudice and discrimination creeping into these forums, if we don't start to eliminate them we will be no better than that other airline forum, and I still don't get what Dubai or the UAE has got to do with Tim Clark stating its going to have higher operating costs for its A380's because they are overweight.

Maybe the moderators should edit some of the statements that are made on a personal basis.

Fully agree.. I have gone the PM route..on similar matters. It seems that certain posters have immunity from "forum rules"

CX · Post by CX » 16 Mar 2007, 05:49

6T overweight accounts for a very small percentage of the plane I suppose, and EK has been complainning about Airbus for years, just trying to get better discounts and compensation! Not long ago Tim Clark said that A380 is a great plane and they needed them for expansion..

chunk · Post by **chunk** » 16 Mar 2007, 09:16

PlaneHunter wrote:It's amazing how many people constantly complain about EK's "slipping standards" - though they still offer a superior product compared to many Asian/ME and most European and US longhaul carriers (Eco class).

It's all opinion isn't it? I have been on many carriers from many different places and in my opinion Emirates has gone from being streets ahead in the early '90's to lagging behind - certainly in business class, but also economy. Delays are frequent thanks to the Dubai hub, which is overcrowded in the extreme at times. Flying to Dubai from the UK, Emirates used to be able to charge a premium in Economy because you knew you would get good food and great entertainment (I was on one of teh first aircraft in the world to have PTV's - EK A310 1992 I think from DXB to London). Now we have T7's with an extra seat in Economy compared to KLM, AF, BA, mediocre at best food though the entertainment is still great. We then have 330's that have wider seats and crappier entertainment. Regional flights are a nightmare as they fill up T7's in airports ill equiped to handle that number of people.

In the past year I have had better flights on South African, AF, KL, Malaysian, Jazeera Airways even Gulf Air in Economy and as for their business class? Miles behind SAA and also behind KL and AF.

As for the prejudice and discrimination comments - you have got to be kidding. I was brought up in DXB and my family have now been there for 26 years. I go every three months to the place so I don't appreciate being accused of discrimination - the infrastructure screw ups are a fact, not a myth and that has nothing to do with discrimination. You see a place who's growth management plan is so completely flawed (and has been for te last 15 years) and built on a reputation of zero financial institutional transparency gradually get worse and worse and worse and that is discriminitation and prejudice? No it isn't.

If people are going to throw accusations around in this forum they better have a damn good reason for doing it. You don't.

David747 · Post by **David747** » 16 Mar 2007, 10:38

What I find interesting is that other A380 are satisfied with the projected operating costs of the Airplane, how come Emirates has different views? Did Mr. Clark explain why their operating costs will be different from other A380 customers? Second, the Dubai-Los Angeles nonstop route would seem difficult with any big plane, like the A380, or the 747-8 to begin with. If I'm not mistaken the A340-600 could perform that route, but with obvious huge costs in fuel.

b720 · Post by **b720** » 16 Mar 2007, 11:05

Well, I lived in DXB too (1975-1987) and do return 3 or 4 times a year. My family still lives there. I have seen DXB when it was a provincial town with a cute small airport catering for 30-40 flights a day and when Gulf Air was the national carrier...I admire what they have achieved and yes it might be flawed at times but does not justify the criticism they sometimes get from some who wish to live in cosmopolitan cities but not get stuck in traffic, they want to fly world airlines (at bargain prices) and expect to be treated as royalty, they simply expect much more than what they would settle for in their own countries. I strongly beleive that the quality of life offered in DXB to expacts from europe, specially those coming from the UK is by far superior to what they get at home. And in most cases superior to what they could have imagined in their wildest dreams. Any expat living in DXB deniying this is ungrateful. Warm weather & no rain, excellent carreer opportunities and well paid, NO INCOME tax, excellent health care, excellent schools, Great food, good shopping, nice apartments and great houses, beautiful beaches, extremely safe environment, very international atmosphere... ok vicious traffic at rush hour... very hot june-sept... and yes Emirates becomming less personalized than it used to be..and the odd delays at DXB.. so what?
As for Emirates, it was GREAT in the beginning because it was unique. Other carriers followed and now it no longer is unique, but remains a world class airline.

PlaneHunter · Post by **PlaneHunter** » 16 Mar 2007, 11:27

chunk wrote:
PlaneHunter wrote:It's amazing how many people constantly complain about EK's "slipping standards" - though they still offer a superior product compared to many Asian/ME and most European and US longhaul carriers (Eco class).
It's all opinion isn't it? I have been on many carriers from many different places and in my opinion Emirates has gone from being streets ahead in the early '90's to lagging behind - certainly in business class, but also economy. Delays are frequent thanks to the Dubai hub, which is overcrowded in the extreme at times. Flying to Dubai from the UK, Emirates used to be able to charge a premium in Economy because you knew you would get good food and great entertainment (I was on one of teh first aircraft in the world to have PTV's - EK A310 1992 I think from DXB to London). Now we have T7's with an extra seat in Economy compared to KLM, AF, BA, mediocre at best food though the entertainment is still great. We then have 330's that have wider seats and crappier entertainment. Regional flights are a nightmare as they fill up T7's in airports ill equiped to handle that number of people.

In the past year I have had better flights on South African, AF, KL, Malaysian, Jazeera Airways even Gulf Air in Economy and as for their business class? Miles behind SAA and also behind KL and AF.

As for the prejudice and discrimination comments - you have got to be kidding. I was brought up in DXB and my family have now been there for 26 years. I go every three months to the place so I don't appreciate being accused of discrimination - the infrastructure screw ups are a fact, not a myth and that has nothing to do with discrimination. You see a place who's growth management plan is so completely flawed (and has been for te last 15 years) and built on a reputation of zero financial institutional transparency gradually get worse and worse and worse and that is discriminitation and prejudice? No it isn't.

If people are going to throw accusations around in this forum they better have a damn good reason for doing it. You don't.

Fine if you think you have a monopoly for rating EK but I can ensure I have also travelled a lot, so my statement is based on real experiences. Mediocre food on EK? You haven't travelled on many European and US carriers lately, have you? And though entertainment on the A332s is not the latest, it's still much better than what many other carriers offer. Numerous carriers still haven't even installed PTVs at all.

Btw - I haven't talked about C class at all.

PH

chunk · Post by **chunk** » 16 Mar 2007, 12:01

No - I dont have any monopoly on anything. This is all about opinions and i thought thats what this forum was for. By expressing an opinion I get called disciminatory when there was nothing whatsoever in what i have said that is discrimination OR prejudice.

I'll be more careful about saying anything on future topics in this website when you get jumped on for showing criticism of anything. Dubai and its activities are not just shot at by me - they had a paradise in 1992 and they have blown it - IN MY OPINION. Sorry if that offends anyones sentiments.

ryanCX · Post by **ryanCX** » 16 Mar 2007, 13:19

LAX-DXB nonstop with an A380?? Isn't that a bit too optimistic, even for Emirates?

TexasGuy · Post by **TexasGuy** » 16 Mar 2007, 17:05

ryanCX wrote:LAX-DXB nonstop with an A380?? Isn't that a bit too optimistic, even for Emirates?

I was thinking the same thing. I thought they were going to do it with a B777LR.
Emirates starts nonstop service to Houston December 2007 with a B777LR, i thought the LAX service would be the same at a later date.

RC20 · Post by **RC20** » 16 Mar 2007, 21:10

CX wrote:6T overweight accounts for a very small percentage of the plane I suppose, and EK has been complainning about Airbus for years, just trying to get better discounts and compensation! Not long ago Tim Clark said that A380 is a great plane and they needed them for expansion..

I absolutely disagree that 6 tons is not a big deal. That’s at least 24 paying passenger. So, 6 tons is a darned big deal. Boeing is adamant that the in service 787s will weigh in what their design target is (that gets a bit contentious, as guaranteed weight and design weight are not the same thing). Boeing wants that last ton gone.

There are also contract penalties for overweight, and failure to meet fuel burn. If its going to compete against the 747-9I, then it better meet those, the figures are close enough that the 6 tons would make it less efficient.

The A380 is not a great airplane yet, its just a darned big one. What’s its actual fuel burn? How reliable is it. Will it ever turn a profit for Airbus?
Its a technical accomplishment, but that does not mean great, it has to be a commercial success for the Ailines that buy it, as well as for the company that sells it.

For me (and this is just personal), I think the 747 has proven itself as a truly great aircraft, and an incredible long lived one as well. That took time. It had its teething problems. I won’t discount the A380 on the basis of those sorts of problems. But it needs to live up to its billing before it can be declared anything.

achace · Post by **achace** » 17 Mar 2007, 01:29

Glad to see we are back on the subject of the 380 weight issues.

The following thoughts come to mind.

The recent re-orders are all RR powered, and on the Airbus website they are claiming under 3 litres per passenger per 100km, which is pretty good.

The cruise speed has been demonstrated at 0.86 against a guaranteed 0.85, so presumably at the lower speed the fuel consumption will be lower, all offsetting, BUT NOT completely mitigating the excess weight.

Maybe the GP7200 is meeting its guarantees, but thus far I dont think it has done route proving, so final figures confirming they match the RR powered plane are not yet available to ease Mr. Clarke's concerns.

One area where the GP uses more fuel is when on the ground because it generates greater residual thrust, which I interpret as more fuel.

Six tonnes is a lot, but it is only 1% of MTOW. A worry for the bean counters.

Cheers
Achace

A350XWB · Post by **A350XWB** » 30 Mar 2007, 06:03

Chew Choon Seng ceo Singapore Airlines :

Emirates, the biggest buyer of the A380 with 45 planes on order, said on March 15 the plane is overweight and may need more fuel to operate, adding to operating costs. Chew isn't ``overly concerned'' about the weight of the aircraft, which has exceeded specifications, set at 569 metric tons, by a few tons

The aircraft ``is slightly overweight by a few tons but it is more than compensated for by the better design performance of the engines and the aerodynamics,'' Chew said. ``Given the need to make sure that it's safe and reliable, we'd rather take the penalty of a bit more weight provided it can still carry the loads for which it was designed

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

CX · Post by CX » 30 Mar 2007, 13:58

A350XWB wrote:Chew Choon Seng ceo Singapore Airlines :

Emirates, the biggest buyer of the A380 with 45 planes on order, said on March 15 the plane is overweight and may need more fuel to operate, adding to operating costs. Chew isn't ``overly concerned'' about the weight of the aircraft, which has exceeded specifications, set at 569 metric tons, by a few tons

The aircraft ``is slightly overweight by a few tons but it is more than compensated for by the better design performance of the engines and the aerodynamics,'' Chew said. ``Given the need to make sure that it's safe and reliable, we'd rather take the penalty of a bit more weight provided it can still carry the loads for which it was designed

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

Emirates just wants more compensation and maybe for Airbus to give them 20 free XWBs in return for those "few tons"..